My rating has nothing to do with any of the authors or writings in the anthology and everything to do with the failures of the anthology as 'A Collection of LGBTQ Writing from Ancient Times to Yesterday' which immediately rings alarm bells because neither the excepts from Homer, the Book of Samuel in the Old Testament, Sappho or Catullus can rightly be termed 'Gay' - because being 'gay' only exists in opposition to being 'straight' and thinking like that doesn't make any sense until Christian morality started defining various sexual acts as 'moral/unmoral' or sinfully' and wrong. There had been sexual taboos of course but the idea that certain sexual acts would condemn you too everlasting hell is a Christian idea. Eventually of course science/medicine examined sexual acts and moved away from religious prohibitions and created the idea of 'normal' and 'abnormal' acts/behavior/ways of life/people etc. To start using terms like 'bi' as a translator of Catullus's poems does is not simply nonsensical, it is dishonest because it is foisting ways of thinking that didn't exist. I object to the inclusion of Achilles lament over Patroclus even more; not because I am denying that they might have been lovers, the ancients had no problem with that but they had problems deciding who was the lover and who was the beloved. As a demi-god and hero on one level Achilles had to be the beloved because he was the most beautiful, most perfect of beings, it would make no sense to view him as being 'enslaved' by love for a mere mortal but, how could a demi-god and hero submit to being the one loved by a mere mortal? Would that place him in a submissive position? (If none of this makes any sense or even worse if you imagine any of it has to do with a question of tops and bottoms then you need to read something about the culture of ancient Greece). Committing a sexual act with someone of your own sex was not a problem for the ancient Greek or Romans or for most cultures before contact with Christianity. That didn't mean you could go around bonking anyone one you wanted at any time. Sex in all cultures was ringed round with various superstitions and who with or when you could have sex depended an awful lot on age, income, social position, etc. and most of what you will read about Greek or Roman 'Homosexuality' and about what could or could not be done was not guidance for every man or male child, let alone every female, but was about the specifics of how a young and older men of the incredible tiny ruling elite should behave so as not to sacrifice or bring their elite status group into disrepute.
What is really disappointing in the first quarter of the 21st century is that an anthology of this sort should be so remarkably similar (except for the inclusion of more writing on, by or about trans people) to anthologies published in the past. Most of the authors represented here can be found in series such as Men on Men, Fresh Men, His and Hers 1,2,3 and many single volume anthologies published between the late 1980s and early 2000s. It is also should have settled for being an English language anthology because its representation of foreign gay writing barely deserves the title 'tokenism'. Latin America below the Rio Grande is represented by Reinaldo Arenas, France by Herve Guibert and Italy by Pier Paolo Pasolini and the rest of Europe not at all. Amazingly gay writing from the USA is even more poorly represented and none of the vibrant gay voices from Black, Latino, or Native American cultures within the USA are represented but Armistead Maupin is there with a piece from one of his more mediocre later novels 'Michael Tolliver Lives' and space was found for a story by Lawrence Schimel! presumably because it involves 'Bears' (it also takes place in Spain so maybe it was felt to represent that country or maybe even all Spanish speaking countries as well).
So why are certain writers and stories included and others not? In the introduction the editor suggests that it is a look back, fifty years from Stonewall, on how things have changed which is an explanation but not a good one. Stonewall has become the iconic moment for many Americans and British people but I doubt that it makes sense for any culture or country were homosexuality was not illegal - which includes anywhere that has a legal system with a Francophone/Napoleonic (which means most of Latin America below the Rio Grande, those parts of Africa and Asia not part of the British Empire, large parts of Continental Europe and Turkey for example) - it doesn't mean there was not a battle for acceptance but it was not the fight for 'legal' changes that concerned campaigners in the USA. The fact that the anthology is so Anglo centric is very disappointing as is the way that 'gays' still try and view themselves from the position of a persecution that prevailed previously. There is plenty of persecution of gays in many parts of the world but there is nothing about how the changed position of gays in 'Western' cultures, the assimilation of gays into simply another part of the consumerist juggernaut that launches young people from school to jobs, to marriage to children to buying houses in the suburbs and gathering things on credit is one of the most far reaching, and for me depressing, changes that I have lived through. Nor is there any real presentation of the way life for young gay people has changed. In London every gay pub or meeting place that I knew in the 20th or very early 21st centuries have disappeared. Even Soho and Old Compton Street's incarnation as London's Greenwich Village and Christopher Street has vanished.
How young gays meet, learn about being gay, as well as find sexual partners has changed but not the threat, at least four young gay men were killed in a small area of London by a serial killer and the police ignored it because of institutional homophobia. I don't think everything is rosy, but it is different and being gay doesn't mean getting a boyfriend, children and mortgage. There are many challenges and stories out there but you would never know that in the UK there is a rich vein of working class and regional gay life and writing. Hollinghurst, Bartlett and Gale are wonderful authors but they have long ceased writing about what it means too be gay now - their books are invariably historical fictions based in a past they knew but which is as distant from those four dead gay young men using grinder to meet their killer in London parks and cemeteries as the worlds of Dickens or Austen.
I would also suggest that future anthologists make clear what the criteria is for inclusion - is it literary or is their a check list of various types of 'lifestyles' or 'types' that they want to include. Also if foreign writers are to be included in translation then full information should be given on any other works available in English. All excepts should be clearly identified so we know which work excerpts come from. This anthology is a huge disappointment for its really staggering mediocrity and for the lost opportunity. I really expected better from someone like Frank Wynne.